Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Division of General Surgery, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, University of Milan, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.
Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Updates Surg. 2021 Jun;73(3):909-922. doi: 10.1007/s13304-020-00916-1. Epub 2020 Dec 14.
The treatment of periampullary and pancreatic head neoplasms is evolving. While minimally invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has gained worldwide interest, there has been a debate on its related outcomes. The purpose of this paper was to provide an updated evidence comparing short-term surgical and oncologic outcomes within Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy (OpenPD), Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy (LapPD), and Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy (RobPD). MEDLINE, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were referred for systematic search. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was executed. Forty-one articles (56,440 patients) were included; 48,382 (85.7%) underwent OpenPD, 5570 (9.8%) LapPD, and 2488 (4.5%) RobPD. Compared to OpenPD, LapPD and RobPD had similar postoperative mortality [Risk Ratio (RR) = 1.26; 95%CrI 0.91-1.61 and RR = 0.78; 95%CrI 0.54-1.12)], clinically relevant (grade B/C) postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (RR = 1.12; 95%CrI 0.82-1.43 and RR = 0.87; 95%CrI 0.64-1.14, respectively), and severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) postoperative complications (RR = 1.03; 95%CrI 0.80-1.46 and RR = 0.93; 95%CrI 0.65-1.14, respectively). Compared to OpenPD, both LapPD and RobPD had significantly reduced hospital length-of-stay, estimated blood loss, infectious, pulmonary, overall complications, postoperative bleeding, and hospital readmission. No differences were found in the number of retrieved lymph nodes and R0. OpenPD, LapPD, and RobPD seem to be comparable across clinically relevant POPF, severe complications, postoperative mortality, retrieved lymphnodes, and R0. LapPD and RobPD appears to be safer in terms of infectious, pulmonary, and overall complications with reduced hospital readmission We advocate surgeons to choose their preferred surgical approach according to their expertise, however, the adoption of minimally invasive techniques may possibly improve patients' outcomes.
胰头和壶腹周围肿瘤的治疗方法正在不断发展。虽然微创胰十二指肠切除术(PD)已在全球范围内引起关注,但有关其相关结果的争议仍在继续。本文旨在提供比较开腹胰十二指肠切除术(OpenPD)、腹腔镜胰十二指肠切除术(LapPD)和机器人胰十二指肠切除术(RobPD)的短期手术和肿瘤学结果的最新证据。通过 MEDLINE、Web of Science、PubMed、Cochrane 中心图书馆和 ClinicalTrials.gov 进行了系统检索。进行了贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。共纳入 41 篇文章(56440 例患者);其中 48382 例(85.7%)行 OpenPD,5570 例(9.8%)行 LapPD,2488 例(4.5%)行 RobPD。与 OpenPD 相比,LapPD 和 RobPD 的术后死亡率相似[风险比(RR)=1.26;95%可信区间(CrI)0.91-1.61 和 RR=0.78;95%CrI 0.54-1.12],临床相关(B/C 级)术后胰瘘(POPF)(RR=1.12;95%CrI 0.82-1.43 和 RR=0.87;95%CrI 0.64-1.14)和严重(Clavien-Dindo≥3)术后并发症(RR=1.03;95%CrI 0.80-1.46 和 RR=0.93;95%CrI 0.65-1.14)相似。与 OpenPD 相比,LapPD 和 RobPD 均显著缩短了住院时间、估计失血量、感染、肺部、总并发症、术后出血和住院再入院。在检出的淋巴结数量和 R0 方面没有差异。OpenPD、LapPD 和 RobPD 在临床相关的 POPF、严重并发症、术后死亡率、检出的淋巴结和 R0 方面似乎具有可比性。LapPD 和 RobPD 在感染、肺部和总并发症方面似乎更安全,住院再入院率更低。我们主张外科医生根据自己的专业知识选择首选的手术方法,但采用微创技术可能会改善患者的预后。